§ Lord Tordoffasked Her Majesty's Government:
What steps they are taking to encourage freight traffic to transfer from road to rail.
§ The Minister of State, Department of Transport (Lord Brabazon)My Lords, to encourage maximum use of the rail network, the Government are backing British Rail's proposals for joint ventures with the private sector and continental rail partners, together with investments totalling over £400 million to establish new freight services through the Channel Tunnel. We have substantially improved the grant scheme for private rail freight facilities, and we are committed to opening access to the rail network to allow further opportunities for the private sector.
§ Lord TordoffMy Lords, I am grateful to the Minister for that reply. Did he see an article in the daily newspapers earlier this week which suggested that his right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Transport had secretly halted British Rail investment of up to £300 million in new freight schemes? The reasoning behind that was that British Rail was not going to be allowed to invest that money until privatisation was accomplished. That does not square with the need to move freight traffic from the roads on to rail—for environmental reasons as much as any.
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, it does not square with that need, and neither is it true. The Government's objective is, as I have said, to secure more investment in the railways, not less. At present, I am aware of one case only (an investment of some £5 million in a fleet of lorries for container delivery) where the department is awaiting information from the railways board on the scope of contracting out the activity to the private sector. Otherwise, there is no question of stopping investment.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, while I support any move to transfer freight from the roads to the railways, is the Minister aware that just outside the House is the greatest highway the world has ever seen—the river Thames? From morning until night it is virtually devoid of any freight at all. Why is that? Why do not this Government, above all, force firms which have non-urgent cargo to use the river Thames for the purpose for which it was intended?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, it is not the Government's policy to force—
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, I know all that.
§ Lord Brabazon of Tara—firms to use a mode of transport which they do not wish to use. Grants available for increased rail freight, known as the freight facilities grants, are also allowable for the increased use of inland waterways.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, nothing is happening.
§ Lord Mowbray and StourtonMy Lords, I accept the merit of trying to put some of the freight on to the railways again; but is not the hope of the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, pie in the sky? With the amount of freight being carried on the roads now, it is impossible to do more than slightly improve the situation. Is it not wrong to give the impression that we shall soon be living in a lovely Utopia where the roads are nearly empty?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I was not trying to give that impression. It is a fact that the majority of freight travels by road and will always continue to do so; but with the opening of the Channel Tunnel, there will be the opportunity—this will apply to longer distance freight, which is where rail transport comes into its own—to increase the amount of freight carried by rail. I hope we shall see that with the opening of the tunnel.
Lord Bruce of DoningtonMy Lords, will the Minister explain how it is that the German state railways are subsidised annually by the German Government to an extent that exceeds in one year all the capital investment programmes that the Minister has announced in respect of British Rail?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I am not sure whether the noble Lord is suggesting that we should follow the Germans in subsidising the railways to the extent that they do. They would probably like to see themselves having to give a smaller subsidy to their railways. The subsidy figures are not strictly comparable between the German and British railways in that the German subsidy includes, I believe, a large element for writing off the repayment of loans, whereas British Rail has a fairly small amount of loan outstanding.
Lord MorrisMy Lords, is my noble friend confident that any increase in rail freight traffic will not affect passenger traffic, nor British Rail's famed punctuality?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I believe that there is ample capacity on the railway system to carry increased amounts of both freight and passenger traffic.
§ Lord MellishMy Lords, I apologise to the House for speaking again, but the answer to my question about the River Thames was terrible. Is the Minister aware that every country in the world with a highway like the Thames uses it? For example, Germany with the Rhine. We do nothing with the River Thames. Why not? Please do not tell me that it is not the Government's responsibility.
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, that is another Question.
§ Lord GeddesMy Lords, does my noble friend agree that the key to persuading freight traffic to move from road to rail is the efficiency of the road distribution system at the rail destinations? Will he comment on that?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, my noble friend makes a good point.
§ Lord UnderhillMy Lords, in the light of the Minister's replies, will he confirm that the Government are prepared to honour their commitment to establish freight terminals in every part of the United Kingdom? If that is their position, will they ensure that finance will be available? Despite the reply given to the noble Lord, Lord Tordoff, may we have confirmation that finance will be available to ensure that freight terminals are established? At the same time, will the Minister say how much finance has been expended on Section 8 grants? Are the Government still committed to removing from environmentally sensitive roads traffic that should be transferred to freight terminals under Section 8?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, regarding the freight terminals in connection with the opening of the Channel Tunnel, British Rail has already announced plans for the nine terminals which will be in operation by the opening of the Channel Tunnel in 1993. As the noble Lord said, they are situated all round the country and I am not aware of any problem with their finance.
As concerns the rules for Section 8 grants, these were changed only last year to make it easier and more attractive to give grants. Since 1979 the Government have awarded 137 grants with a total value of £55 million, which have enabled over 2.5 million lorry journeys annually to be removed from the roads. Since our announcement last year on changes in the scheme, we are now looking at applications for a further £35 million or so of gross capital cost projects.
§ Lord EzraMy Lords, in addition to the measures which the noble Lord said would be taken to try to stimulate the movement of freight by rail, will he indicate whether a research and development effort is also being mounted?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, I am afraid that I am not aware of the research and development in that area. I shall have to look into the point and write to the noble Lord.
§ Lord TordoffFinally, my Lords, since the Minister has denied the veracity of the newspaper statement, will he comment on the other statement in the article which suggests that the Secretary of State has blocked a grant for a new Channel Tunnel freight terminal for Liverpool at Seaforth?
§ Lord Brabazon of TaraMy Lords, as I said, the purpose of Section 8 grants is to support the provision by the private sector of rail freight facilities which would not otherwise go ahead. In the case that the noble Lord mentions, the decision to go ahead was taken and announced by British Rail and the Mersey Dock and Harbour Company before any proposal for 1550 grants was put to the department. It follows that a grant cannot be required in order to enable the project to proceed, therefore it would not be a good use of taxpayers' money.